REPORT OF PAKISTAN STUDIES

ON
MILITARY INVOLVEMENT IN PAKISTAN

DONE BY GROUP MEMBERS

HEER 22I-2371
HANIA WAHEED 22I-0982
FATIMA 22I-1074
MUHAMMAD FAWAZ 22I-2340
FAZAL ZAMAN 22I-2362
AMAN QAISAR 22I-2360

SUBMITTED TO SAJID KHAN.

DATE OF SUBMISSION 04/5/2023
Table of Contents

Historical background of military interventions in politics in Pakistan…………………………………………………. 2

Impact of military interventions on Democracy and democratic institutions in Pakistan……………………… 2

The role of Media in shaping public perception about military interventions in Politics in Pakistan………4

Case studies of military interventions in politics in Pakistan such as Zia-ul-Haq's regime and

Musharraf's regime………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………5

Analysis of the current situation and future prospects of military interventions in politics in Pakistan….6

The Role of political parties and their response to military interventions in Politics in Pakistan…………….8

Solutions and recommendations to address military interventions in politics in Pakistan……………………..9

References…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..10

1|Page
Historical background of military interventions in politics in Pakistan:

Introduction:

The interference of the military in politics has obstructed,

the progress of democracy in countries like Pakistan.
After the separation from India,
The military become involved in domestic affairs,
considering the political, economic, and social
conditions. The study reveals that the military's,
dominance grew at the expense of civilian authority,
mainly due to a heavy reliance on the military after
partition. It also highlights how military intervention,
has evolved from direct to indirect methods in
Pakistan. The study concludes that if elected civilian,
governments pose a threat to the military's interests,
it will continue to exert influence over political affairs indirectly.
(Altaf, 2019)

Impact of military interventions on Democracy and democratic institutions in

Pakistan. Years From 1947 to 1949:

The involvement of the Pakistan Army in national affairs dates to the early days of
independence when it played a crucial role in planning and executing the First Kashmir War
from October 1947 to April 1949. The civilian government at the time was unable to launch a
direct military invasion of the disputed state, so it turned to non-state actors for assistance,
while the Pakistan Army's involvement was limited to assigning two of its officers to a covert
headquarters established with the approval of Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan. Some officers
were also granted leave to lead the infiltrators. It wasn't until the spring of 1948, when the
Indian Army threatened to advance beyond the Uri-Poonch-Naushera Line, that the Pakistan
Army became fully engaged in the conflict.

Incident In Which Military Take An Action:

The following incident that occurred due to this are given below: This is how the paradigm of
Indo-Pakistan hostility was constructed. Iskander Mirza's son was married,to Hildreth's
daughter. Bhutto rose to power following 1971War because of the political and economic
turmoil in Pakistan during that time. (Malik, 2022)

Discussing The Years After the Partition:

2|Page
Pakistan's military controls a large commercial empire worth billions of dollars, involving
businesses run by welfare foundations and institutional military involvement in various
enterprises. The military's economic power has allowed it to accumulate wealth and exert
social, political, and economic influence. This dominance
has been reinforced by successive military leaders
rewarding their followers with greater benefits. The
military has also nurtured the religious right to
consolidate its control over the state and society.
However, Milbus is costly to Pakistan, both economically
and socially, increasing inter-ethnic tensions and
reducing the acceptability of the military as an arbiter
among political interests. The military's financial
autonomy hampers the growth of democracy in Pakistan,
and internal democratic forces need to be strengthened to push the military out of politics.
(Siddiqa, 2007)

From 1951 to 1958:

The political situation in Pakistan from 1951 to 1958, which saw a series of political
appointments, including seven prime ministers and one commander in chief. The period was
marked by continuous infighting and unrest between the political leadership and government,
resulting in the dismissal of various ministers and governors. The country was also facing an
economic crisis, with scarcity of consumer goods, rising prices, shortage of food, financial
indiscipline, and large-scale deficit financing by the government. According to political analysts,
the main reason why Ayyub Khan initiated martial law was because of the lack of economic
efficiency in the country. He was also relied upon to rebuild the Pakistani Army and restore
order during riots and lawlessness in East Pakistan and the persistent clashes with tribal and
paramilitary forces on the Northwest Frontier. (Altaf, Ayub Khan Era, 2019)

In Ayyub Khan Era:

The events of 1968 and the subsequent collapse of Ayyub Khan's government could have been
for Ayyub Khan to address the concerns raised by Bhutto and the student demonstrations. He
could have worked towards implementing reforms to address corruption, nepotism, and civil
administration issues within the government. Additionally, he could have taken steps towards
resolving the Kashmir issue through diplomatic means. By addressing these concerns, Ayyub
Khan could have avoided the rise in support for Bhutto and other political parties. This would
have prevented the need for the military to pressure Ayyub Khan to resign and transfer power
to Yahya Khan. Instead, Ayyub Khan could have worked towards establishing a more
democratic system of government that would have allowed for peaceful transfers of power
between political parties in the future. (Altaf H. , 2019)

3|Page
Role of media in creating public awareness about military intervention in
politics in Pakistan:

Both mass and electronic media plays an important role in creating public awareness about
military interventions in politics in Pakistan. The media has the power to influence public
opinion and it can play an important role in legitimizing or authorizing military action. However,
media coverage has been a mixed bag. Pakistan, a developing state with multiple social,
economic, political and security issues, is not insulated from the media effects of the
contemporary world. In fact, the Pakistani media is described as more open, blunt, and
proactive than before. It now highlights the social wrong-doings, economic mismanagement,
and political inaccuracies prevalent in the country. Over the years, Pakistani media has become
a strong medium of scrutinizing the functioning of state institutions; instead of offering policy
options to the government, it has taken over the task of policymaking. Now, let's explore the
role of mass media in shaping public perception of political involvement in Pakistan.

Content of Military Intervention:

There was extensive media coverage of the military intervention in Pakistan. Some media
supported military interventions, while others criticized them. In the past, the media was
controlled by the military; that’s why military interventions were widely censored. However,
with the growth of independent media in recent years, military intervention has become more
balanced and varied. In Pakistan, where the media have close ties with political parties or the
military, the issue of media is an important one. Some media actively support military
interventions, while others criticize them. Ideally, the media should be impartial and free from
propaganda mechanisms. It should provide a balanced account to the people. But in some
cases, media outlets have been accused of publishing pro-military or pro-government
propaganda. However, the media is not always impartial; media bias leads to inaccurate
information or reporting and propaganda.

Role of social media:

Social media has emerged as a powerful force in shaping public opinion about military
intervention in Pakistan. Social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook have allowed
citizens to voice their opinions and share information about military interventions. However,
social media is also a platform for spreading fake news and misinformation, which can lead to
confusion and uncertainty in military intervention. Media coverage of military intervention in
Pakistan can have a significant impact on public opinion. A positive environment can legitimize
military intervention, while a negative environment can authorize it. In some cases, media
coverage can even shape public opinion to the extent that it influences political decisions.

4|Page
Challenges faced by the media:

The media in Pakistan faces several challenges when reporting on military intervention. This is
because the military has strong influence over the media, and journalists who criticize the
military or the government may face harassment, intimidation, and physical violence. This is
what is happening nowadays. In addition, the media is often subject to censorship and
government pressure to control reporting. In conclusion, the media plays an important role in
creating public awareness about military intervention in politics in Pakistan. The media can
legitimize or allow military intervention and even influence political decisions. However, media
bias and censorship remain significant problems in Pakistan, and journalists who are critical of
the military or the government face many challenges. The rise of independent media and the
rise of social media have created new opportunities for citizens to express their views on
military intervention, but they have also created new challenges, such as the spread of fake
news and misinformation. As Pakistan continues to navigate its political future, it is imperative
that the media remain free and independent, providing citizens with accurate and balanced
information about military intervention and its impact on democracy and democratic
institutions

Military Intervention in Pakistan:

Military interventions in Pakistani politics are not new; the

country has experienced, martial laws and military rules,
multiple times in its history. The eras of General Ziaul-Haq
and General Pervez Musharraf are examples of military,
interventions in Pakistan's political and economic landscape.
This case study focuses on their political, economic, and social
policies and their impact on Pakistan.

Ziaul Haq Era:

Ziaul Haq’s martial law in 1977 suspended the 1973,
Constitution and dissolved the federal and provincial, cabinets and assemblies. He emphasized
Islamization, and created the National Security Council to impose a state of emergency and
veto political decisions made by political leaders. His economic policies focused on reducing
the budget deficit and
attracting foreign investment, but they also led to a rise in poverty, inflation, and
unemployment. Zia's era led to political repression, censorship, and the suppression of civil
liberties, and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and sectarianism.

General Musharraf Era:

General Musharraf dismissed Prime Minister

Nawaz Sharif in a bloodless coup in 1999 and
became the President of Pakistan. He did not
5|Page
declare martial law but was criticized for his dictatorial politics mixed with lifestyle liberalism.
Musharraf created the National Security Council in 2004 to legitimize the military's role and
strengthen his position. His close ally, Shaukat Aziz, became the Prime Minister, which
marginalized opposition parties. Musharraf's rule was supported by westernized elites, radical
civil society groups, and technocrats. The 9/11 attacks legitimized his military dictatorship, and
he became a vital ally in the international anti-terrorism coalition.

Experiencing of Military Intervention:

Pakistan has experienced multiple military interventions in its political and economic landscape.
Ziaul Haq and Musharraf's eras had a significant impact on the country's politics, economy, and
society. While both emphasized economic development and Islamization, their policies also led
to political repression, censorship, and the suppression of civil liberties. Pakistan continues to
grapple with the legacy of military interventions in its political history.

Analysis of the current situation and future prospects of military interventions

in politics in Pakistan:

Army intervention in politics is a routine phenomenon in Pakistani history, with the army
frequently playing a crucial function within the country's politics. although civilian rule changed
into restored in 2008, the United States’ army maintains to play a first-rate position in
authorities selection-making, particularly with reference to security and overseas coverage.
Pakistan's contemporary government is headed through high Minister Imran Khan, who took
office after triumphing the 2018 elections. but he is believed to have performed a considerable
position in his victory as the military controlled the election and induced chaos for the
competition. When you consider that then, the authorities have confronted many demanding
situations, including monetary disaster, political instability, and weak safety. In these
demanding situations, the military has proven it influences government coverage. for instance,
it's far accused of censoring the media, banning speech, and limiting space for civilians and
protesters. Further, the military is involved inside the security of the USA, with the Commander
of the military, general Kamal Javid Bajwa, playing a crucial role in the formulation of the
government's safety policy. also, the Pakistani navy has lengthy supported military
corporations, in India and Afghanistan. This support has caused tensions with neighboring
countries, leading to conflicts and divisions around the world. Regardless of the international
crisis, the Pakistani army is not willing to break with these organizations by way of expressing
hobby in method. The destiny of military intervention in Pakistani politics is unsure.
Alternatively, there are symptoms that the military's energy may want to grow even greater,
given it manipulate over countrywide protection and financial resources. similarly, the army has
efficiently persuaded public institutions inclusive of the judiciary and the media to legitimize its
authority. alternatively, there are symptoms of opposition to army intervention from civil
society, activists, and the media. The institution criticized the navy's function in politics and
known for the public to pay greater attention to safety and foreign policy. There are also
developing calls for democratic reforms, which include strengthening civil society and

6|Page
enhancing the electoral technique. The worldwide network additionally has a obligation to
expand Pakistan's destiny. At the same time as some countries have proper family members
with the navy, others have criticized the army's moves, in particular its support for armed
businesses. If the international community continues to reach out to Pakistan to clear up these
problems, it can inspire the army to surrender several its powers and allow extra freedom. As a
result, army intervention in politics has deeply affected Pakistan's history and could keep
forming its destiny. Although the military intervention will take location, there are symptoms of
resistance from civil society, activists, and the media. The role of the international community
in assisting democratic transition and protecting Pakistan accountable for its actions might be
critical in determining the use of a's path forward. Pakistan's democratic institutions must be
reinforced and the army's function in politics reduced to make sure a stable and rich destiny
for the country.
Pakistan's current political climate is marked by frequent military intervention that undercuts
the democratic process, and the political power of parties. Political parties in Pakistan have
responded to military measures differently over the years. Some are against military rule, while
others support it.

Discussing About Pakistan People’s Party:

Pakistan People's Party has always been at the forefront in the fight for democracy, and it is
opposed to military action. Zulfikar Bhutto founded this party, which played a major role in

7|Page
gaining popular support in the 1960s-1970s against dictator Ayyub Khan. Bhutto's overthrow
and execution by Ziaul-Haq was in 1979. However, the PPP continued to be the major
opposition party that criticized military interventions.

Awami National Party:

The Awami National Party has also openly criticized military rule, and struggled to keep its
presence in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, which was the focus of many military interventions. ANP
condemns military actions in the area and demands more civil control of security policies.

Pakistan Muslim League:

The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, led by Nawaz Shariff, was accused instead of clashing
against the military to undermine democratic institutions. Sharif has been elected twice as
prime minister but also resigned both times. In 1999, he was removed in a coup by the military
led by Pervez Musharraf and then impeached in 2017 by Pakistan's Supreme Court. The Sheriff
alleged that the military interfered in civil affairs and urged for greater civilian oversight over
military policies.

Mujtahid Quami Movement:

A second political party has an uneasy relationship with the army. It is the Mujtahid Quami
Movement. MQM, which was perceived as being pro-military in the 90s and enjoying the
military's support at the time, has a complicated relationship with the military. In the early
2000s our relationship with the army deteriorated and they acted against us, accusing them of
crimes committed against the party. Since then, the MQM has distanced itself from military
control and demands more civilian influence over security policies.

Tehreek-e-Insaaf:

Imran Khan's Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf has become a powerful political force within the last
few years. PTI criticized military interventions in the past but was accused of being close to the
army. Khan's administration has come under fire for the way it handles press freedom,
democratic institutions, and human rights. Political parties have taken different positions on the
action of the Pakistani military. Some oppose military rule, while others claim that the military
undermines democratic institutions. Pakistani political parties are important in protecting and
strengthening democracy. The fight for civilian control of the military is a key issue.
Issue of Military Influences:

The stability and growth of Pakistan's democracy have been severely hampered by military
interference in politics. It is required to take a number of steps to improve democratic
institutions and limit the military's influence in politics in order to address this issue.

8|Page
Solution of this Effects:

1. First, they must be strengthened to ensure that civilian institutions like the judiciary, media,
and civil society can function independently without military interference. This can be done by
boosting their budget, offering training programs, and putting legislation in place that
safeguards their independence and right to free speech. The military can be held accountable
for its conduct by being given more authority by these institutions.
2. To ensure free and fair elections, the electoral process needs to be reformatted. This includes
steps like establishing impartial election commissions, open vote-counting procedures, and
safeguards against military meddling in the electoral process. Media outlets and members of
civil society can watch the electoral process to ensure that it is fair.
3. Thirdly, more people need to be made aware of the drawbacks of military participation in
politics. This can be accomplished through promoting the value of democratic institutions and
principles in educational programs, media campaigns, and public discussions.
4. Finally, there is a responsibility on the part of the international community to address
military interference in Pakistani politics. The international community can assist Pakistan to
lessen military influence in politics and develop democratic institutions by using diplomatic
pressure and financial incentives. In order for media outlets and civil society organizations to
function independently and hold the military responsible, they can also offer support and
technical aid to those groups.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, combating military interference in Pakistani politics necessitates a multifaceted

strategy that incorporates bolstering democratic institutions, improving the electoral system,
raising public awareness, and involving the international community. Pakistan can advance
towards a future that is more stable and democratic by implementing these actions.

REFRENCES SOURCES:
Bibliography
Altaf, H. (2019). Ayub Khan Era. New York.

9|Page
Altaf, H. (2019). Collapse of Ayub khan Regime. New York.
Altaf, H. (2019). History of Militar y of Military Inter y Interventions in P entions in Political
Affairs in P olitical Affairs in Pakistan. Hina Altaf, 4.
Malik, S. A. (2022). A history of civil-military interventions in Pakistan. Global Village Space.
Siddiqa, A. (2007). Military Inc. – Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy. London: Pluto Press.
Hussain, D. N. (2012). The Role of Media in Pakistan. Journal of South Asian and Middle Eastern
Studies, 34:4.
Mass media in Pakistan. In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_media_in_Pakistan.
https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4274&context=gc_etds
https://books.google.com/books/about/Military_Intervention_in_Politics.html?
id=tP4LAAAAIAAJ

10 | P a g e